On 2013-01-14, at 5:25 PM, Anton Vodonosov <avodonosov@...> wrote:
> 14.01.2013, 00:20, "Elliott Slaughter" <elliottslaughter@...>:
>>
>> Have you tried the running the tests from cl-test-grid? It would be especially interesting to see how x86-64 compares to x86.
>
> The (acos -1) error was found by cl-test-grid, but on older SBCL version. I have no chance to install and test the new version yet.
That's a very old bug. Instead of linking to libm, we have a number of trivial stub implementations for transcendentals on windows. I'm not sure that importing a BSD libm in our tree is the right fix.
Do contemporary win32 lack a full libm? This workaround may be useless now that we only support windows XP and up.
Paul Khuong

14.01.2013, 00:20, "Elliott Slaughter" <elliottslaughter@...>:
>
> Have you tried the running the tests from cl-test-grid? It would be especially interesting to see how x86-64 compares to x86.
The (acos -1) error was found by cl-test-grid, but on older SBCL version. I have no chance to install and test the new version yet.
Speaking of which. Maybe you would like to learn how to use cl-test-grid to do SBCL pre-release testing
by building all quicklisp libraries and compare the results with previous SBCL version?

On Monday 14 January 2013 02:22:23 Anton Kovalenko wrote:
> Anton Vodonosov <avodonosov@...> writes:
> > I have previous versions of SBCL on Windows (namely
> > 1.1.0.36.mswinmt.1201-284e340 from the akovalenko's branch
> > and 1.1.0.45).
> >
> > They both have bug in the ACOS function:
> > (acos -1) signals division-by-zero error.
> >
> > Is this error present in the new version?
>
> Looks like no one touched this code for a long time, so it should be
> there (in my branch, it definitely is).
>
> BTW, it's x86-only.
Sorry, I don't look sources yet. But two or thre years ago, when I have
porting psl version of reduce to win7/64, I find bugs in microsoft
math. I just have changed all function with sources taken from NetBSD.
Anatoly

Elliott Slaughter wrote, On 1/13/13 5:30 PM:
> [snip]
> At any rate, it looks like this will cost some non-zero amount of money, which
> is usually a limiting factor for open source projects in general. Certainly,
> if I can get away with using my existing SSL cert from my personal website
> [3], then I would be happy to try signing the installer with that. Otherwise
> it depends on what CAs charge for these sort of certs.
>
> Can someone with knowledge of MS code signing comment on this?
The CA may be the same but you need to get a code signing certificate from
them, which is an SSL cert that is marked as being valid for that use. There
may be a free option for open source projects by joining the Intel Application
Developer Zone
http://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/how-do-i-get-code-signing-certificate-certifying-authorityhttp://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/code-signing-issues-and-solutions
Note that Intel accepts a number of different CAs but only offers the free
(actually subsidized) option with Comodo.
http://www.comodo.com/news/press_releases/2011/08/Comodo-Announces-Intel-Application-Certification-Service.html
"Comodo will offer fully subsidized one-year Code Signing Certificates to the
Intel AppUp developer program community to address the program requirement
that all Windows-based applications (.MSI, .JAR and .AIR) be signed by a
Certification Authority (CA)."
If you do this, make sure that you timestamp the signature. Otherwise when the
certificate expires in a year the application no longer verifies as signed.
The cost for a Comodo signing certificate when bought from some discount
Comodo resellers instead of directly from Comodo appears to be about $95 per year.
There are less expensive signing certificates available from StartSSL (also
known as StartCom) but they have two-year expiration without the ability to be
timestamped. So you save some money if you don't care that old versions of
your application will stop verifying as signed. StartCom does offer timestamp
capability but only if you purchase an EV certificate, which is more money and
requires documents from your lawyer to verify your business identity.
I have not seen any better alternatives for obtaining a code signing
certificate from a CA that is in the OS's root certificate list.